Dean Chambers to the White Courtesy Phone


There’s a petition drive in Ohio to put a referendum on the ballot to repeal the ban on same-sex marriage famously passed in 2004 and the polls are showing that a majority of residents of that state support the repeal. Cue the inevitable “the polls are skewed” mantra from the right:

The Christian Science Monitor has listed Ohio as one of 11 “battleground states” for gay marriage. In 2004, Ohioans approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage by 62 percent; but a poll taken in March by the Public Religion Research Institute indicates a majority of Ohioans now approve of gay marriage.

But Citizens for Community Values President Phil Burress dismisses the polling, adding that his group will fight any effort to legalize gay marriage in Ohio.

“On no other issue in America is the polling data is so wrong,” he said. “The real polls are when people go to the polls and vote.”

Well of course polls alone aren’t going to decide it, but last year marriage equality was 4-4 in states and the results tracked the polls in all of them. Maybe you can get Dean Chambers to unskew those polls for you, since it worked so well for him in 2012.

Comments

  1. whirligig says

    “I’ve never changed my mind about anything or figured out that I was being an asshole and corrected my opinions or behavior, so it’s impossible that other people would have those mysterious powers.”

  2. D. C. Sessions says

    But Citizens for Community Values President Phil Burress dismisses the polling, adding that his group will fight any effort to legalize gay marriage in Ohio.

    Please, please do. After all, this is the wedge issue that the Republicans have chosen for their final triumph over the forces of liberal evil. Remember 2004?

  3. jla1125 says

    Sarah Palin does not want a job that requires her to do anything more than wake up and get out of bed in the morning. Oh, wait a minute. That may make her perfectly qualified to be a U.S. Senator.

  4. ianeymeaney says

    Of course that poll is wrong, it uses thing like “facts” and “reality”.

  5. Robert B. says

    If the Republicans want to survive as a party, they need to get WAY better about using polling data. Once you’re in office, you can deviate from reality all you want and let someone else take the consequences, because that’s how power works, but if you want get elected in the first place you need to know the terrain, so to speak. If the Republicans keep ignoring polls, they’re going to keep walking into walls during elections, and eventually even the Democrats are going to figure out how to run circles around them.

    Of course, the image of the Republican party crashing in a cloud of confused self-righteousness sounds great to me. I hope they lose all the accurate pollsters’ numbers and listen only to yes-men who tell them what they want to hear their constituents want to hear.

    (Honestly, I’m still boggled that Romney didn’t write a concession speech in advance. You’d think the party of theocrats would know better than anyone else about tempting the wrath from high atop the thing…)

  6. Gvlgeologist, FCD says

    Robert B. – SSSSHHHHhhhhhhhh. Don’t give it away. I think the Dems have already figured “out how to run circles around them”. They’re going to use… reality.

  7. John Hinkle says

    “On no other issue in America is the polling data is so wrong,” he said.

    Is. Is. Was. Was. Whatever. Just put on your blinders and look through the tunnel in front of you. Then you’ll see, in your creamy soup of stupidity, that “everyone” thinks like you.

    Reality on the other hand, that bastard child of no gods, has no bias…

  8. exdrone says

    He sounds like an avid golfer loading his bag in the car in a downpour before setting out for the club. “Rain? This isn’t rain. It’s a sprinkle. Besides, it will burn off by lunch. We’ll definitely get 18 in. I doubt that we’ll even get wet.”

  9. sezme says

    So, here’s your nit pick of the week:

    ..but last year marriage equality was 4-4…

    It should be “4 for 4″ or “4-0″. “4-4″ reads to me “4 wins, 4 loses”.

    You’re welcome. We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

  10. Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says

    @dingo:

    That’s clearly the way Ed intended it, but it’s not at all in line with conventions in writing about series of contests. Look at any sports page in the US (the relevant local dialect for Ed’s writing) and you’ll not see 4-4 to mean anything other than 8 played, 4 wins, 4 losses. This is the very reason conventions exist. While 4-4 could mean 44 played, all outcomes unknown, 4 played all losses (with the absence of wins), or any other such thing, we as humans want to communicate with each other. The speculation as to meaning doesn’t help that communication: clarity does. Dictionaries and conventions are resources used to provide that clarity. While these reflect use, not the other way round, one goes against them only when a unique context (including the written context you create) makes such a new use clear…or you accept that people are going to read you as you’ve written and not as your totally mind-readable intention.

    In this case there was absolutely nothing in Ed’s writing to make this clear. You either knew the win loss record in such contests last November without Ed, or you had no reason not to believe Ed wasn’t saying opinion is now 50/50 [and thus significantly different from 2004].

Leave a Reply